.
Here is one interpretation of a near-death experience.
.
Here is another interpretation of a near-death experience, which happen to result in Scientology.
http://www.xenu.net/entheta/entheta/media/tv/secret/secret.html
.
These different interpretations of near-death experiences seem to depend on the cultural background and the personality make-up of the experiencer.
Can we separate the interpretations from the experience and get a scientific explanation of what AWARENESS is?
.
According to KHTK AXIOM #2:
“Awareness arises with relative motion, and disappears when there is no relative motion.”
Awareness is the most intimate part of us yet we don’t understand it because we take it for granted. Can we look at AWARENESS scientifically as a phenomenon, and describe it accurately?
.
Comments
I am sure there is no dearth of near-death and/or out-of-body experiences. You may write your experiences here, or place a link to it, for this study. Thanks.
LikeLike
Again…..”I am sure there is no…….” is a pretty bold statement.
LikeLike
dearth noun
1. an inadequate supply; scarcity; lack: There is a dearth of good engineers.
2. scarcity and dearness of food; famine.
.
LikeLike
Please note that “relative motion” can occur not only among physical objects. But it can also occur among mental objects found in the perception of abstraction and visualization.
https://vinaire.me/2013/07/12/the-sixth-sense/
.
LikeLike
Just as there is wave phenomenon that condenses into wave packets and particles, can there also be an awareness phenomenon that condenses into mental packets and mental particles?
.
LikeLike
This seems reasonable. How can we use this?
LikeLike
What 2ndxmr is talking about as “awareness unit” could be like a mental packet condensed from a wavelike awareness.
.
LikeLike
It seems that the freer is the motion the more wavelike it appears; and the greater resistance it acquires the more particlelike it becomes.
Thus, in the famous double-slit experiment when the experiment is set up to detect which slit the photon or electron is passing through, it must introduce some resistance because the motion behaves more like a particle. When the experiment is not set up that way then there is less resistance and the motion behaves more like a wave.
It seems that observation is part of the phenomenon. It introduces lesser or greater resistance to the phenomenon of motion.
.
LikeLike
This is consistent with your conjecture of relative motion. Regardless, What is going on must be very slight.
LikeLike
V:”It seems that the freer is the motion the more wavelike it appears; and the greater resistance it acquires the more particlelike it becomes.”
Waviness compared to freeness is an interesting concept. The question is, how does observation affect freeness? We could say that we see light all the time and it stays wavy. What is it about a single photon that it now becomes a rule-based phenomenon, that rule being “if observed, condense to a particle; if unobserved, condense to a wave.”
Then it gets weirder when it is found that by destroying record of the path-observation a formerly-condensed-as-particle electron will re-appear as a wave phenomena. (See the “delayed eraser” experiments for a full coverage.)
This phenomena begins to smack so heavily of a rule that it makes one wonder if the engineers of the universe put that rule in place to make minds wonder about the possibility of engineers of the universe.
LikeLike
Aha! Engineers, a clue.
I am so very anthropomorphic in nature that I seem to attribute anthropomorphism to what I observe. This seems to be partly natural but I don’t seem to be able to separate out what part of it is conditioned thinking and which part is simply natural to my firmware. Then I am not sure whether this inclination helps or hinders my understanding of things or whether it is even possible for me to stop doing this. Nevertheless, I understand why you would say such a thing and have seen and allowed for that possibility in my own model of the universe as well.
LikeLike
2X: This phenomena begins to smack so heavily of a rule that it makes one wonder if the engineers of the universe put that rule in place to make minds wonder about the possibility of engineers of the universe.
CT: Yes and if we are to believe Godel and Heisenberg and not wish them away, we need to consider the possibility of a determinism at work in our reality, an engineered model if you will, with a curtain pulled completely it with a slot to put in quarters and a screen that lights up “game over” when the time runs out.
LikeLike
We all have experienced moments when we just do things without even thinking or reflecting on ourselves. Those moments would contain no observation. Actions would simply flow with a consistency. To me that would be wavelike freedom of motion.
In that state there is no attention on self. There is not even thought of self. Motion simply flows with a natural consistency without any resistence.
The moment attention goes on self and there is the slightest bit of introspection in terms of observation of self, inertia creeps in and motion slows slightly. That may be similar to the state of the photon.
Photon may be the light obeserving itself. This is just a wild conjecture. We are the phenomena we are observing.
.
LikeLike
Vinaire: Photon may be the light observing itself. This just a wild conjecture. We are the phenomena we are observing.
Chris: This is a profound and concise statement about consciousness. Gassho Rei.
LikeLike
If we look at awareness as part of the phenomenon then there is no probabilistic state. There is a definite state all the time.
The state of motion may be fluctuating dynamically in its wave or particle like properties depending on the resistance it is experiencing at any moment.
Awareness with its attention may introduce varying resistance.
.
LikeLike
The speed of light, c. seems to be the property of motion when there is no inherent resistance. As motion acquires resistance it gains particle like properties as follows:
(1) It gains inertia, which gets stored as mass.
(2) It gains discreteness and location.
(3) It gains existence and duration.
(4) It gains momentum and becomes more difficult to move
(5) The speed it can attain reduces from c.
Thus, motion goes from a state of ‘unknowable’ to the state of ‘universe’.
.
LikeLike
V:”The speed of light, c. seems to be the property of motion…”
Please clarify your meaning of motion here. Are you meaning the motion of the thingy that appears to be moving, or motion of the medium in which the thingy appears to be moving?
If we considered the thingy to be a wood chip and the medium to be water, the difference is talking about the wood chip being moving independent of the water compared to it being moved by the water.
We have discussed light propagation in space before along the following lines:
– in the current model of physics, light, as a photon, is a quantum thingy that has a fixed speed, no rest mass, but the ability to transfer momentum just as if it did have mass. In this model, space has a permittivity and resistivity to EM but no origin of those parameters is described and the effects of these parameters are linked to properties of electric field and magnetic field propagation.
– in a model which I described, space is a definable medium that propagates an energy impulse by an actual propagating disturbance of space, just like water is a medium that propagates an energy impulse as a disturbance of the water – a wave. With water, the energy of the disturbance is carried by the wave and that energy can be transmitted to a receipt point – whatever the wave hits.
Similarly, it space is a medium, a disturbance of space by – say an electron changing energy levels – could be propagated simply as a disturbance of space as opposed to an actual thingy like a photon. At a receipt point of the space disturbance – like another electron – the disturbance of space transfers energy to the electron in a manner very similar to that of a medium like water. This model explains why there would be no rest mass and is consistent.
There might even be a thought experiment that could confirm this (whether a photon is a unit on its own or a disturbance of local space):
If the photon were a unit of energy that did not depend on space for propagation, then photons emitted by our universe would be continually escaping the physical boundaries of our universe as light speed is faster than the expansion rate of the universe’s physical bodies (galaxies). In this case, light from our universe should, at some point, reach a more distant universe.
The corollary of this should also be true: that light emitted from some other universe – such as one that was much older than ours – should be visible to us, and given sensitive enough equipment, we should at some point be able to detect that light.
Of course, one can always take an easy way out and say that no light from another universe will ever be detectable because:
– we’re the only universe, or
– the rules of another universe may be too different from ours, and light based on those rules will always be undetectable, even if present (like dark energy), or
– (please add)
But if we don’t automatically take the easy route then “space being a medium that can transfer energy by motion of the medium” is as, or more valid than “photons are energy packets apart from space and E=h(nu) = mc^2 (except it doesn’t).
LikeLike
Any area in which light could travel to from here would be defined as this universe. Another universe would be defined as having no spacial relationship with this one. Galaxies have been seen as far as telescopes can see. There is no reason to believe that there aren’t many more beyond that, other than the ‘believed’ age of this universe.
“The universe is a boundless sphere whose center is everywhere.”
It is my OPINION that if one were to travel instantly to the farthest edge of the known universe and set up telescopes, one would see just what we see now. Galaxies as far as the telescope could see in every direction.
Mark
LikeLike
MarkNR: Any area in which light could travel to from here would be defined as this universe. Another universe would be defined as having no spacial relationship with this one.
Ct: Good point and good post.
LikeLike
2x: This model explains why there would be no rest mass and is consistent.
Ct: Like it because right or wrong, it directly addresses and resolves a paradox. This cannot be a bad thing for the answer to the correct equation will likewise dissolve this paradox of “massless things.”
LikeLike
When I think of the ultimate motion, I am not looking at anything moving. I am looking at things forming out of that motion as inertia is introduced. Those things would still be moving but at a lesser speed.
Here I look at speed very differently, because there is nothing to compare it to initially. It is invisible. It becomes visible as inertia is introduced.
To me, motion contains within itself the aspects of space and time. Without motion, space and time do not exist. The thing and the medium – both precipitate out of motion. They go hand in hand,
Light has fixed speed in space because of the fixed properties of space expressed in terms of permittivity and permeability. Quantum effects seem to be the result of observation being introduced. The earliest form of mass seems to be discretization. Thus, light wave condensing into photons is displaying a presence of mass. There is probably an almost imperceptible slowness from the speed of free wave. Evidence of mass seems to come form evidence of form. Form is acquired when observation takes place. How the form develops into becoming more concrete is likely to be an interesting area of reasearch.
.
LikeLike
Vin: The earliest form of mass seems to be discretization. Chris: And just underpinning this, entanglement? I may not be using this word correctly.
LikeLike
Acceleration seems to bring inertia into play. For any level of inertia, there seems to be a limiting velocity, such as c. Any effort to accelerate beyond this limiting velocity generates additional inertia, which gets stored as mass.
.
LikeLike
The double-slit experiment seems to indicate that EXPECTATIONS add inertia to a system at some level, whereas FREE ASSOCIATION seems to reduce that inertia.
This is a wild conjecture.
.
LikeLike
It is consciousness (awareness) that seems to be expressed through motion. Motion seems to be the key expression of consciousness or awareness.
Motion, and therefore, consciousness goes from the state of ‘unknowable’ to the state of ‘knowable universe’.
It is desire or expectation that drives consciousness from the state of unknowable toward the state of knowable.
.
LikeLike
There is inertia associated with electromagnetic waves. That inertia is axpressed by the terms ‘Permittivity’ and ‘Permeability’.
Permittivity of “space” is a constant that relates to the amount of resistance encountered when forming an electric field in a classical vacuum.
Permeability of “space” is a constant that relates to the amount of resistance encountered when forming a magnetic field in a classical vacuum.
.
LikeLike
The speed of light (limiting velocity, c) is directly related to permittivity and permeability of classical vacuum.
http://www.reciprocalsystem.com/rs/satz/permit.htm
.
LikeLike
Constant motion has a different feel than accelerated motion.
When you are in a train standing still and there is another train on the next tract. When one of the two trains starts to move very gently, you may not feel the force, but you do feel that your position is changing, even when it is the other train that might be moving.
If the train starts with acceration then you feel the force. You feel this force even when you are not looking at the other train.
So the feeling of dislocation is associated with relativity of motion.
And the feeling of force, or gravity is associated with acceleration of motion.
.
LikeLike